Myth 1: In
English-speaking countries, those with dyslexia form a discrete and
identifiable (diagnosable) category of people who are
persistently slow and inaccurate single word decoders.
Facts:
What was for a great length of time the most
commonly used definition of
dyslexia ('IQ discrepancy' where reading age was considerably
lower than IQ would predict) was discredited a long time ago. No operational
definition has appeared to take its place. Without an operational
definition there is no scientifically valid way of separating the 'dyslexics'
out as a special group. This means that all
who have a persistent difficulty accurately decoding single words could be
correctly described as dyslexic - see What is dyslexia?
Myth 2: This is the BIG one:
those 'professionally' diagnosed
with dyslexia have inherited a brain defect.
As a result of this 'neurodevelopmental flaw' they lack phonemic awareness
and manipulation ability
(PA), having failed to progress through what is deemed to be the
biologically-dictated development of speech sound - print awareness: beginning with
whole spoken words - logographs, progressing down in size through
syllables, then rhymes - rimes/analogies to the smallest units of sound and print: the phonemes
- graphemes. This final stage is supposed to occur naturally in children without the brain glitch
by the age of 6-7.
See
http://www.dyslexics.org.uk/main_method_2.htm
Skipping over the earlier 'developmental'
stages by explicitly teaching phoneme-grapheme correspondences from the very
beginning of instruction, as happens in high quality phonics programmes,
especially if children are younger than 6-7, is believed to be potentially
damaging to children's 'natural' development of PA, likely to
exacerbate the difficulties of those who harbour the faulty brain wiring and could
harm children's love of reading.
Facts:
The
ability to identify and process the individual phonemes
in the speech stream of the people talking to and around them is innate and universal in young
babies, but they are not consciously aware of this ability. Babies
use their phonemic processing ability to identify and
manipulate the
individual phonemes in
their
native language/s on their journey to develop
speech. By the time they are a
year old,
this 'wired-in' phonemic ability
has faded
into the background of
the brain, accessible (though not always easily-see below),
but never needed consciously unless, some years later, they have to learn to decode and spell
using an alphabetic writing system. (D.McGuinness. GRB
p33-35)
Phonemic awareness
is essential (but not sufficient) for learning to decode and spell when a
writing system uses an
alphabetic code,
but not if a different writing system (syllabic or diphonic)
is used.
Studies ''show the strong impact of the type of writing system
and type of instruction on the development of
phonemic awareness - an environmental effect, and restates the point that you do
not acquire this aptitude unless you need it'' (D.McGuinness WCCR p135).
Whilst a tiny percentage of children become
aware (conscious) of the phonemes and graphemes in their environment early on
and seemingly effortlessly, and put the two together (''the rapid graspers''
DfE) through a lucky combination of nature and
nurture, because of the complexity of the English alphabetic code, most pupils
need an extensive period of high quality phonics instruction in order to become fluent and accurate
decoders
and spellers.
Even when taught by expertly trained teachers using high quality phonics, children will not acquire PA at the same rate*. ''(T)he ability to access the phoneme level of speech is
heritable...on a continuum of innate ability''
(D.McGuinness WCCR p151)
Hearing difficulties in the early primary years can also,
unsurprisingly, slow down PA acquisition but often goes undiagnosed-see
http://www.dyslexics.org.uk/is_my_child.htm
A child's position low on the PA acquisition curve is unlikely to be apparent
(level of intellect, vocabulary size and rhyming ability are poor indicators)when they begin school, so providing high
quality phonics instruction to all children from the start is essential
to prevent word decoding difficulties appearing. Those low on the PA curve and
those with hearing difficulties will fall into that small group of pupils
who are highly likely to need regular 'keep-up' phonics tutoring in addition to whole-class phonics teaching.
* Falling on the lower end of the PA acquisition curve is not
the same as having a brain defect.
Any child, apart from those with severe cognitive and perceptual impairments
(less than 5% of the population), can be taught to recognise and manipulate
the individual phonemes of the English language using high quality phonics
instruction **which includes the graphemes.
** ''Phoneme analysis sufficient to be able to decode is acquired much more rapidly in the context of print than in isolation''
(D.McGuinness. Response to Hulme)
''Lots of studies showing kids do better when phonemic
awareness tasks are tied to print. Phonemes emerge in part
from exposure to print'' (Prof. Mark
Seidenberg) ''Teaching
children to manipulate phonemes using letters produced greater effects than
teaching without letters''
(USA.National Reading Panel)
Further reading: D.McGuinness's book: Language Development & Learning to Read
p37-> 'A Theory Becomes Dogma'
Myth 3: Children who
fail to learn how to
decode single words fluently and accurately from the school's
wave/tier 1 classroom reading instruction (see
http://www.dyslexics.org.uk/should_I_have.htm) and continue to fail, despite being subjected
to one or more (wave/tier 2 and 3) analytic phonics,
phonics-lite or Reading Recovery-type interventions,
are ''phonetically deaf'' and ''treatment
resisters''. They can, at last,
be legitimately labelled as dyslexic.
For information on
ineffective interventions- see
http://www.dyslexics.org.uk/room_101.htm
Facts:
Unless the
student falls
into the tiny percentage of the population
who ''have severe cognitive
impairments that would make acquiring reading skills extremely
difficult'' (Eab.com.
Narrowing the Third-Grade Reading Gap), the most
likely reason why they struggle to decode
single words
accurately is dysdidaxia (a problem with the teaching) (Macmillan p134). ''We know that the intellectual crippling of children is caused overwhelmingly by faulty instruction -not by faulty children'' (Engelmann&Carnine 1982.Theory of instruction). ''(F)ailure to read is often to do with the nature of the teaching rather than the nature of the child'' (Rose 2009 p60)
''The Response to Intervention framework
was devised as an alternative to the discredited IQ
/Achievement Discrepancy “Model” for the designation of
“Learning Disability.” Schools and teachers find the newer
“Model” attractive because it takes the “problem kids” out of
mainstream instruction while sustaining present instructional
practices and maintaining the turf of psychologists and
“Special Education” specialists. Parents find it attractive
because the children involved are receiving increased personal
and specialized instructional attention. By the time a child
has gone through Tier 3 [England.Wave 3], the child, parents, and
school personnel are thoroughly convinced that the child has a
“disability.” The tragedy/travesty is that the “problem” the
child had when first identified as “at risk” has morphed into
a “really big problem” for which the child bears the full
responsibility''
(Prof.Schutz)
''If your child
hasn't been taught to read by their Class Teacher [in Tier 1],
it's unlikely the 2nd or 3rd Tier are going to be any
different.'' points out Ms.Wang, parent of a struggling
reader, from experience.
''Phonetically deaf'' children are rare in mainstream schools that teach
high quality synthetic phonics from day one: at St George's
primary school in Wandsworth, London, an area of high
deprivation, all the children (boys and girls,
summer-born, in receipt of free school meals...) reached the expected
standard in the phonics decoding check 6 years in a row, and
all the children in Y1 and Y2 (2018) spell at CA or better.
Myth 4: The prevalence of
dyslexia is estimated to be somewhere between 4%- 8% of the
UK population (Rose 2009 p11)
and up to 20% in the USA.
Facts:
''Any attempt to determine the prevalence of dyslexia should be treated with caution'' (Miles p27).''In the absence of a definition that provides unequivocal identification criteria, all statements about prevalence are guesses; they are value judgements, not scientific facts...The British Dyslexia Association's prevalence estimates of either 4 per cent for severe dyslexia or 10 per cent to include mild dyslexia have been described as both theoretically and technically contentious'' (Rice/Brooks p19-20)
All that can be said with any certainty is that in every
English-speaking country a significant percentage of the
population have single word decoding and spelling difficulties varying from mild through to severe.
Myth 5: Those who have been professionally diagnosed as having ''specific learning difficulties consistent with dyslexia'' need a special
sort of intervention which is different from that deemed
suitable for 'common-or-garden' struggling decoders
and spellers. Furthermore, this special instruction should only be delivered by qualified teachers who have undertaken a long and expensive training course which has been approved and accredited (and often provided) by one of the powerful dyslexia lobby groups***
Facts:
Having thoroughly checked the government's use of evidence in policy-making on dyslexia, the UK Parliament's Science
and Technology committee concluded that, ''The government should stop talking about specialist dyslexia teaching. Children diagnosed with dyslexia and children who struggle with reading for other reasons, are taught how to read in exactly the same way''. The committee also said that, ''(T)he Government should be more independently minded in the formulation of dyslexia policy: priorities appear to be based on pressures from lobby groups rather than on research'' (S&T committee pressnotice 18/12/09)
Whatever their age or IQ,
students who have
serious difficulties with single word decoding
and spelling need intensive, one-to-one,
high quality phonics instruction,
not ''something different (from phonics)'' see-
What NOT to teach.
Myth 6: Those
professionally diagnosed with dyslexia have other difficulties
such as poor short-term memory, sequencing problems and rapid
naming deficits (RAN),
in addition to their very slow and inaccurate
single
word decoding and spelling. These
other difficulties
can be used to confirm the diagnosis of dyslexia
The number and type of co-occurring difficulties vary from one dyslexic
person to another, as does the severity.
Facts:
These are 'soft' signs - not based
on data that is readily quantifiable or amenable to experimental
verification. ''Forget
about letter reversals, clumsiness, inconsistent hand
preference and poor memory - these are commonly found in
people without reading difficulties, and in poor readers not
considered to be dyslexic''
(Prof.Elliott .TES)
''(D)yslexia has been linked erroneously to left-handedness,
balance deficits, persistence of infant reflexes, visual perceptual
abnormalities and nutritional deficiencies'' (Snowling.
BDA website news17)
''The
fact that RAN (rapid automatic naming tasks) using digits
and letters predict reading so much better than RAN colours
and objects do, means that naming speed per se is not a factor
in learning to read.'' (D.McGuinness
LDLR p388) ''Naming objects and colours is a truer reflection of natural or biological based ability'' (D.McGuinness WCCR p131)
Many so-called dyslexia symptoms
such as b/d confusion and word reversal are simply the consequence
of poor teaching and lack of practice.
Myth 7: Dyslexia is caused by inherited, faulty genes with evidence coming from studies of twins.
Facts:
As there is no operational definition of dyslexia, it is
not possible to find true dyslexic
individuals as subjects for a scientifically valid study. This means that the results of all the heritability studies and genetic models of dyslexia are invalid: ‘'The twin studies leave a lot to be desired, starting with the identification of their subject 'dyslexics'. Most such work is done with the University of Colorado and their Prof. Olsen has recently (after the IQ-achievement criterion died) stated that the bottom x% of the bell curve of reading ability can be considered 'dyslexic’ and this is great because ''if we deploy the bell curve of normal distribution we can bring the big guns of statistics to bear''. This is outrageous, of course. The bottom x% are not to be presumed all to have the same neurological deficit (or any at all) with no demonstration of same'' (Kerr. RRF message board 29/09/09).
Claims to link a complex, learned behaviour that
has to be taught (not part of species specific trait) to a
gene complex, can only be bogus. ''Thus, contrary to what practitioners may sometimes suppose,
family relationship (familiarity) alone is not a reliable
indicator of genetic heritability'' (Rice/Brooks
p32)
In English-speaking countries where, every year, at least 20% of children leave school functionally illiterate, nearly everyone has a relative (or several) who failed to learn to read.
Myth 8: Dyslexia is a visual problem
- dyslexics
sometimes see letters reversed, transposed or moving around.
Facts:
Prof. Vellutino showed this was incorrect when he ''asked dyslexic and non dyslexic American children to re-produce Hebrew letters none of them had seen before... the poor readers performed as well as the normal readers in reproducing Hebrew letters from memory...Absolutely no differences between the two groups. If anything the normal readers made more errors than the poor readers, so the poor readers could see the materials as well as the normal readers'' (Mills.
The Dyslexia Myth)
''Teams
from Bristol and Newcastle universities carried out eye tests
on more than 5,800 children and did not find any differences
in the vision of those with dyslexia...Where there were
dyslexic children with eye problems, the occurrence was no
more likely than for non-dyslexics, the study found. And a
large majority of dyslexic children were defined as having
"perfect vision"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-32836733
A subset of this myth is that 'dyslexics' can be helped by
providing them with reading materials printed using a special
'Dyslexie' font on tinted paper.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/dys.1527
See
http://www.dyslexics.org.uk/room_101.htm for full
information on 'Visual Therapies' especially the use of
coloured lenses and overlays.
Myth 9: fMRI brain scan studies show that dyslexics' brains work differently from
non-dyslexics' brains.
Facts:
In addition to the impossibility of finding true dyslexics
as subjects for a scientifically valid study, ''The recent studies using fMRI, convincingly show what everybody who knows anything about the brain can tell you, that when someone can't read, images of his brain taken while he is trying to read will look different to someone who can read. Furthermore, when the poor reader is taught to read, the patterns of his brain metabolism will look identical to someone who can!'' (D.McGuinness.
Response to Hulme)
''(T)here is a mistaken belief that current knowledge in [genetics and neuroscience] is sufficient to justify a category of dyslexia as a subset of those who encounter reading difficulties'' (Elliott/Gibbs p475)
Dyslexia: Still Not a Neurodevelopmental Disorder.
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3425/9/1/9 "We recently pointed out
that there is no evidence to support the commonly held view that there
is something wrong with the brains of children who have great difficulty
learning to read ..."
Myth 10: The planum temporale area of the brain is 'abnormally symmetrical' in dyslexics.
Facts:
This claim is based on the dissection of just a small number
of brains taken from people previously diagnosed as
'dyslexic'. The lack of an infallible definition for dyslexia,
along with the tiny number of research subjects, makes this
study's conclusions scientifically invalid; ''35 percent of the population have symmetrical brains. Symmetry is not pathology''. (D.McGuinness WCCR p118)
Myth 11: Short-term memory deficit is a hallmark of dyslexia (NTF.p6)
Facts:
Poor short-term memory ''is the symptom most often quoted as distinguishing dyslexics from other poor readers, and those who have difficulty reading are more likely to suffer from it. Yet, however disabling poor short-term memory may be, evidence suggests it neither causes reading difficulties nor predicts the outcome of intervention. In a highly regarded study conducted by Joseph Torgesen, a psychologist at the University of Florida, out of 60 children with severe reading difficulties, only eight had poor short-term memories, while almost as many – seven – had very good short-term memories''
(David Mills.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/3347022/Dyslexia-a-big-expensive-myth.html)
Myth 12: Dyslexia is
an incurable
brain defect. It ''will not go away with tuition, practice, hard work etc'' (Klein quoted in Kerr p113)
Facts:
''Shaywitz and others in the Connecticut Longitudinal Study followed children to see if the discrepancy diagnosis of dyslexia was constant from one grade to another. 25 children were diagnosed dyslexic in first grade and 31 in grade 3, but only 7 were classified as dyslexic in both grades. Of the 24 children classified as dyslexic at fifth grade, only 14 were also dyslexic in third grade''
(D.McGuinness. WCCR p136-7).
If struggling decoders are given
expert synthetic / linguistic phonics
tuition early
enough (large differences in reading practice
begin to emerge as early as the middle of the first-grade
year (Stanovich p 162))
in their education, their dyslexia
will 'go away'. Sadly, unless
high quality
phonics tutoring is put into place extremely quickly,
along with complete cessation of multi-cue word reading, the
negative side effects of early mal-instruction
such as the 'bad habit' of guessing and a dislike of reading
and writing,
are likely to persist and fluency is unlikely to ever be achieved. If newly taught
code knowledge and skills are not practised extensively they are bound to erode too.
Myth 13: Dyslexics are compensated for their
lack of phonemic awareness and weak
decoding skills by being
naturally gifted in the creative /
visual-spatial sphere:
Famous dyslexic chef Jamie
Oliver thinks that ''children with dyslexia are 'lucky''. In his book,
'David and Goliath', journalist and author Malcolm
Gladwell describes dyslexia as ''a desirable difficulty'' (see Prof. Seidenberg's book 'Language at the
Speed of Sight' p178-185 for a critique). The 'Made by
Dyslexia' charity suggests that ''Dyslexia can be a blessing''
(The Times. Oct 2020)
Facts:
Comforting though this idea may be
for some, it is simply ''opinion bolstered by anecdote''.
''Being unable to read is not a
gift, not a superpower and sending this message of dyslexics
being special is really unhelpful''
(Amanda,
parent of a 'dyslexic' child.
Twitter)
The late Martin Turner, formerly head of psychology at Dyslexia Action, said that it was
a 'travesty' to talk about dyslexia as a bonus when it
caused such suffering. ''It's a myth that there are compensatory
gifts. Dyslexics go into the visual arts like sheep head for
a gap in the hedge. They aren't more creative, they are more
stressed.'' (Jardine) In a review of the research on dyslexia, Dr. Rice and Professor
Brooks came to the same conclusion. ''On anecdotal evidence,
the belief that 'difficulty
in learning to read is not a wholly tragic life sentence but
is often accompanied by great talents' may seem attractive. However, systematic investigation
has found little if any support for it.'' (Rice/
Brooks p18)
The late 'dyslexic' journalist AA Gill confirmed this view
when he wrote, ''In truth, of course, dyslexics end up in the
art room or the music studio or the drama class after school,
because it’s the only place they aren’t special-needs
remedial. They get good because they can’t do anything else.''
(Times 08/04/07)
When researchers at the University of Edinburgh tested 'the hypotheses that those with reading disability are compensated with enhanced creativity', they found that, ''Stronger reading was in fact linked to higher creativity, controlling for IQ''
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104160801300040X
More recently, researchers in Chile explored the links between reading skills and creativity. Their findings
did ''not support the hypothesis that specific reading disability is associated with better performance on creative tasks''
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9314276&fileId=S1138741614000596
''The war of words over dyslexia:
now it's a blessing, not a curse''
(Leah Hardy. The Telegraph. Oct 2020)
https://iferi.org/iferi_forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1383&p=2878#p2878
Myth 14: Dyslexia can be accurately diagnosed by an educational
psychologist or a 'specialist dyslexia teacher' using special tests.
Facts:
No scientifically valid
tests are available that can differentiate
the dyslexics from
other poor decoders: ''After three decades as an educationalist, first as a teacher
of children with learning difficulties, then as an educational
psychologist and, latterly, as an academic who has reviewed
the educational literature, I have little confidence in myself
(or others') ability to offer a diagnosis of dyslexia.'' (Prof.Elliott. TES)
Because of their inability to give a legitimate
diagnosis (there is no legal definition of dyslexia in
England Singleton p16),
a specialist dyslexia tutor or educational psychologist's written report is very unlikely to include the concrete label of dyslexia. Instead, it will substitute words such as, ''has a specific weakness in phonological development''
(see Myth 2), or it will be hedged about with words that avoid commitment to a definitive diagnosis: ''exhibited a pattern of difficulties characteristic of dyslexia''
(see Myth 6), ''has a dyslexic profile'' or ''is at risk for Dyslexia-SpLD'', with the discrete 'dyslexia' label only given to parents verbally. See 'Should I have my Child Assessed?'
Myth 15: Dyslexia can be found world-wide.
Facts:
In countries which have a transparent
writing code (e.g.
Austria, Finland
and Greece (The Science of Reading. Philip Seymour p299)),
it is rare to find people who are
persistently inaccurate
single word decoders i.e. dyslexic in the
English-speaking countries' sense of the word.
English reading tests commonly assess accuracy of
single word
decoding but, because of the high
word reading accuracy in countries with transparent codes,
these tests are
not used and reading fluency is assessed instead i.e. the term dyslexia means something completely different in these countries (RRF49 D.McGuinness. p19 & The Science of Reading. Philip Seymour p297) ''If dyslexia [as a distinct and
diagnosable decoding disorder] really existed then countries as diverse as Nicaragua and South Korea would not have been able to achieve literacy rates of nearly 100%'' (Stringer).
See
D.McGuinness' critique of Goswami's TES article on 'dyslexia'
across different languages
www.rrf.org.uk/messageforum/viewtopic.php?t=2995
Myth 16: It
is possible to correctly identify and diagnose
those with dyslexia
living in countries which have transparent writing
codes, by testing students' reading
fluency, because those with this specific brain
defect, despite being accurate
single word
decoders, find reading effortful and slow.
Facts:
When researchers Landerl, Wimmer and
Frith (1997) compared Austrian 'dyslexic' children (slow
readers) with English 'dyslexic' children (very inaccurate
readers), the Austrian
'dyslexics' were not only far more accurate but also read
twice as fast as the English dyslexics.
''Slow reading' is relative;
the optimal reading rate varies
across writing systems. ''Slowness''..is a function of the writing system, not a property of the child'' (D.McGuinness ERI p191-2)
Reading speed isn't an isolated skill. It's a function of
decoding accuracy, text difficulty and general language
ability'' (D.McGuinness
GRB p14)
Myth 17: Dyslexia can be cured or helped by
special balancing exercises, fish-oils, glasses with tinted
lenses, vision exercises, listening to modified music, NLP
magical spelling, modelling clay words, inner-ear-improving medications, training primitive reflexes, eye occlusion (patching),
special fonts, rhyme-analogy
games, accupressure....
Facts:
Empirical evidence does
not support the use of any of the above
remedies - see Room
101 Does Dyslexia [as a distinct and
diagnosable decoding disorder] Exist?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227704059_Does_Dyslexia_Exist SEN Magazine (no.49. Nov/Dec 2010) - scroll down to read Susan's article:
'Six myths about dyslexia' www.rrf.org.uk/docs/SEN49_Dyslexia_myths.pdf
https://www.ldaustralia.org/client/documents/BULLETIN_MAY14-ELLIOTT-1.pdf
Prof. Julian Elliott: The dyslexia debate: some key
myths
Report on British Dyslexia Association Courses for Reading and Spelling -includes comparison with synthetic phonics course content: http://www.rrf.org.uk/pdf/Report%20BDA%20Training%202012.pdf
*** BDA: ''Specialist dyslexia teaching: an umbrella term for approaches that are used by teachers who have attained accredited specialist qualifications in the teaching of children and adults with dyslexia. Training courses are accredited by the British Dyslexia Association'' (Rose 2009 p199)
Patoss: The Professional Association of Teachers of Students with SpLD ''(O)nly those who have passed a BDA accredited course can become specialist members of this professional association'' (Rose 2009 p95)
Dyslexia Action went into administration in 2017.
It no longer offers student assessments or tutoring. It
continues to provide
''training for teachers to become specialist dyslexia teachers'' (Rose 2009 p190)
Helen Arkell Dyslexia Centre: ''The Centre offers training to professionals who wish to develop their skills in addressing dyslexia -including training to become a specialist dyslexia teacher'' (Rose 2009 p193)
© |